Larsen L P, Olesen F
Research Unit for General Practice, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
J Med Screen. 1996;3(3):133-9. doi: 10.1177/096914139600300306.
Several studies have compared attenders and non-attenders in organised cervical screening programmes but few have analysed subgroups of attenders and non-attenders. This study presents social and other characteristics of such subgroups.
Aarhus County, Denmark.
A case-control study in a cohort of 133,500 women, aged 23-60, included in the programme from 1 October 1990 to 1 April 1994. The participation rate was 75%, and those taking part comprised women with opportunistic screening or who had had a smear owing to symptoms in the previous three years ("active" attenders), and women who were invited for screening because they had not been otherwise tested ("passive" attenders). "Passive" (n = 708) and "active" attenders (n = 692) were compared. Women who had never had a smear test ("never" attenders, n = 287) were then compared with "ever" attenders (n = 1215)-that is, women who had not had a smear test during the previous 42 months, but had had at least one previous test. Data were collected by mailed questionnaires.
The response rate was 81% and 53% for attenders and non-attenders, respectively. After correction for age, there was no difference between the "active" and "passive" attenders for cancer risk factors (smoking, age of first intercourse, number of sexual partners, and social group), or in the degree of responsibility for close relatives, but "active" attenders seemed to have more frequent contact with their general practitioner. "Never" attenders had less frequent contact with their general practitioner than "ever" attenders. They were more often living alone and nullipara, but had no overrepresentation of cancer risk factors.
Increased effect cannot be obtained by focusing on the described groups, but by increasing the participation rate. "Never" attenders do not belong to a special risk group.
多项研究对参加有组织的宫颈筛查项目者和未参加者进行了比较，但很少有研究分析参加者和未参加者的亚组情况。本研究呈现了这些亚组的社会及其他特征。
丹麦奥胡斯郡。
一项病例对照研究，纳入了1990年10月1日至1994年4月1日期间该项目中的133,500名年龄在23至60岁之间的女性队列。参与率为75%，参与者包括因机会性筛查或在过去三年因出现症状而接受涂片检查的女性（“主动”参加者），以及因未接受过其他检查而被邀请参加筛查的女性（“被动”参加者）。对“被动”参加者（n = 708）和“主动”参加者（n = 692）进行了比较。然后将从未接受过涂片检查的女性（“从未”参加者，n = 287）与“曾经”参加者（n = 1215）进行比较，即过去42个月内未接受涂片检查但之前至少接受过一次检查的女性。通过邮寄问卷收集数据。
参加者和未参加者的回复率分别为81%和53%。校正年龄后，“主动”和“被动”参加者在癌症风险因素（吸烟、首次性交年龄、性伴侣数量和社会群体）或对近亲的责任程度方面没有差异，但“主动”参加者与全科医生的联系似乎更频繁。“从未”参加者与全科医生的联系比“曾经”参加者少。他们更常独居且未生育，但癌症风险因素并无过度表现。
关注所描述的这些群体并不能提高效果，而应提高参与率。“从未”参加者不属于特殊风险群体。
